A federal judge’s ban on federal funding for embryonic stem-cell research has been lifted by an appeals court.
This is excellent news for American science; the opposition to embryonic stem-cell research has been fueled almost entirely by the irrational, anti-science religious right, and it’s long past time to get their boots off our necks.
1 |
Bubblehead II Thu, Sep 9, 2010 3:18:59pm |
This ban has put us (United States) what? Eight years behind in research?
| 2 |
jamesfirecat Thu, Sep 9, 2010 3:20:30pm |
You know Charles I think you may have set a record for posts today, there have been what at least a dozen of them?
| 3 |
Political Atheist Thu, Sep 9, 2010 3:21:13pm |
re: #2 jamesfirecat
Nice, more like the old days.
| 4 |
Political Atheist Thu, Sep 9, 2010 3:22:37pm |
re: #1 Bubblehead II
Did we not continue with the work from umbilical cord blood stem cells?
| 5 |
Brother Holy Cruise Missile of Mild Acceptance Thu, Sep 9, 2010 3:24:50pm |
According to Germany Peak Oil has been reached..
H/T balloon juice.
| 6 |
angel Graham Thu, Sep 9, 2010 3:24:58pm |
About time. Now can they do the research to help people? Please.
| 8 |
enoughalready Thu, Sep 9, 2010 3:27:32pm |
re: #1 Bubblehead II
This ban has put us (United States) what? Eight years behind in research?
Far more than eight. Even though it has helped creating some rather nifty workarounds the ban itself has ensured that a rather substantial number of talented scientists have left the US and founded companies or found gainful employment elsewhere in the world. Now, I think that there are US companies that will likely invest and consolidate the market, cherry pick a bit. But the fact remains that cutting edge research is not happening in the US and will not happen for quite some time because there simply isn’t any infrastructure (in terms of brains) at this particular point in time.
That will resolve itself but it will take some time.
| 9 |
jamesfirecat Thu, Sep 9, 2010 3:28:24pm |
re: #8 enoughalready
Far more than eight. Even though it has helped creating some rather nifty workarounds the ban itself has ensured that a rather substantial number of talented scientists have left the US and founded companies or found gainful employment elsewhere in the world. Now, I think that there are US companies that will likely invest and consolidate the market, cherry pick a bit. But the fact remains that cutting edge research is not happening in the US and will not happen for quite some time because there simply isn’t any infrastructure (in terms of brains) at this particular point in time.
That will resolve itself but it will take some time.
Unless another Republican President/Congress/Senate gets elected and slams the ban back into place one way or another….
| 10 |
Bubblehead II Thu, Sep 9, 2010 3:32:13pm |
re: #4 Rightwingconspirator
I believe so, but iirc, they are also two distinctly different lines of research. I could be wrong though.
| 12 |
enoughalready Thu, Sep 9, 2010 3:33:09pm |
re: #9 jamesfirecat
Unless another Republican President/Congress/Senate gets elected and slams the ban back into place one way or another…
Then it will resolve itself that way. The country will be terminally left behind, but then again, nobody seems to be able to understand the implications of what Craig Venter and his team are doing so it might be for the best either way. The world will change, and quickly.
| 13 |
RogueOne Thu, Sep 9, 2010 3:37:00pm |
So the democrats mentioned in the story don’t have a problem with the ideal of a unitary executive when there’s a democrat in the seat. I wonder if they’ll feel the same when there’s a republican president again. The hypocrisy reeks. What the judge ruled was that the president doesn’t have the authority to change the rules set by the congress on a whim with just his signature, something they flipped over when Bush did the same.
[Link: www.nytimes.com…]
With the case back in his court, Judge Lamberth ruled that the administration’s policy violated the clear language of the Dickey-Wicker Amendment, a law passed annually by Congress that bans federal financing for any “research in which a human embryo or embryos are destroyed, discarded or knowingly subjected to risk of injury or death.”
Here’s a weird suggestion, if the dems believe the law is mistaken then why not change the actual law and, you know, do their damn jobs.
| 15 |
jamesfirecat Thu, Sep 9, 2010 3:40:37pm |
re: #13 RogueOne
So the democrats mentioned in the story don’t have a problem with the ideal of a unitary executive when there’s a democrat in the seat. I wonder if they’ll feel the same when there’s a republican president again. The hypocrisy reeks. What the judge ruled was that the president doesn’t have the authority to change the rules set by the congress on a whim with just his signature, something they flipped over when Bush did the same.
[Link: www.nytimes.com…]
Here’s a weird suggestion, if the dems believe the law is mistaken then why not change the actual law and, you know, do their damn jobs.
Here’s an idea if Republicans actually believe in majority rule, why don’t they stop filibustering every bill the democrats try to pass?
| 16 |
RogueOne Thu, Sep 9, 2010 3:42:30pm |
re: #15 jamesfirecat
Yeah, good argument. You got me. The dems have had a majority now for 6 years but it’s the republicans fault. How’s that argument playing this election season you think?
| 17 |
deranged cat Thu, Sep 9, 2010 3:44:07pm |
re: #16 RogueOne
Yeah, good argument. You got me. The dems have had a majority now for 6 years but it’s the republicans fault. How’s that argument playing this election season you think?
i’d say its good. the republicans are filibustering every bill. it’s not opposition to the bill, it’s opposition to democrats, period.
| 18 |
jamesfirecat Thu, Sep 9, 2010 3:45:19pm |
re: #16 RogueOne
Yeah, good argument. You got me. The dems have had a majority now for 6 years but it’s the republicans fault. How’s that argument playing this election season you think?
It’s going to f**ing fail because about 1 in every four Americans know that a majority in the senate isn’t worth bupkiss in the face of a determined minority.
[Link: pewresearch.org…]
| 19 |
allegro Thu, Sep 9, 2010 3:45:52pm |
re: #16 RogueOne
It’s been 6 years since 2006? ZOMG I lost 2 years!
| 20 |
teleskiguy Thu, Sep 9, 2010 3:48:15pm |
GOOD NEWS on a fast and weird sort of news day. Cheers!!!
| 21 |
RogueOne Thu, Sep 9, 2010 3:49:38pm |
re: #19 allegro
It’s been 6 years since 2006? ZOMG I lost 2 years!
Good point, I still got the “6” part right though, I’m calling it fake but accurate.
| 22 |
Ming Thu, Sep 9, 2010 3:50:27pm |
Lifting the funding ban is great news. The opponents of stem-cell research have no problems with the thousands of human embryos who are created and discarded every day in fertility clinics. But they will not allow 0.1% of those embryos to contribute stem cells to be used for medical research. Unfortunately, many Americans do not understand how awesome the potential of human embryonic stem cell research is. Fortunately, medical research is proceeding in other countries. I have no doubt that multi-national biotech companies are well-aware of the differences between backward countries (America, Iran, Egypt) and more promising countries (Israel, Germany, Singapore) when it comes to medical research.
| 23 |
allegro Thu, Sep 9, 2010 3:52:42pm |
re: #22 Ming
I have no doubt that multi-national biotech companies are well-aware of the differences between backward countries (America, Iran, Egypt) and more promising countries (Israel, Germany, Singapore) when it comes to medical research.
The fickle nature that has been clearly demonstrated by stem cell yes/stem cell no crap makes it a real bad bet for companies to invest in here regardless of the current standing of the issue.
| 24 |
Yashmak Thu, Sep 9, 2010 4:13:14pm |
Good news, this. I was hoping it would go this way when I started seeing the headlines a couple weeks back.
Let’s hope we can keep it from being banned again long enough to make up some lost ground, research-wise.
| 25 |
William Thu, Sep 9, 2010 4:15:16pm |
Was there a “ban” on research, or a ban on federally-funded research?
| 26 |
Yashmak Thu, Sep 9, 2010 4:22:21pm |
re: #25 William
I believe it was on Federally funded research. If it frees up millions of dollars for said research, as stated in the article, it’s great news.
| 27 |
robdouth Thu, Sep 9, 2010 4:36:39pm |
For being so gung ho about the precise use of language in correctly not labeling the community center the ‘ground-zero mosque’ I can’t understand the cavalier use of the term ‘federal ban on stem-cell research’. That makes it sound like it’s illegal to do, when in actuality there is no ban on stem cell research, just the federal funding of it. It’s still a win for science moving forward, but there’s a lot of confusion and people who think stem-cell research is/was actually banned because the improper wording by opponents of the funding ban. Shouldn’t be too hard to be clear about that.
| 28 |
robdouth Thu, Sep 9, 2010 4:41:36pm |
re: #22 Ming
That’s silly. I’m sure they have a problem with the embryos that are discarded, but the idea is to create life, not create life to destroy it for research. Although I disagree with those opposed to stem-cell research I’m willing to understand the ethical dilemma they face, and it’s sad when it’s opposition is dealt with so flippantly as to just call them (insert derogatory term) right or reactionary and you never have to address any legitimate concerns they may voice.
| 29 |
rwdflynavy Thu, Sep 9, 2010 4:48:25pm |
re: #25 William
Was there a “ban” on research, or a ban on federally-funded research?
That fact keeps getting lost. There is no ban on Embryonic Stem-Cell research. But don’t let that get in the way…If there was great promise in embryonic like there is in adult stem cell, private companies would already be funding.
| 30 |
robdouth Thu, Sep 9, 2010 5:00:55pm |
re: #29 rwdflynavy
It is strange, especially when there is (and correctly so) a big push here to not refer to the community center in new york as either “ground-zero” or a “mosque” because it is neither, so it’s just surprising Charles would publish such an inaccurate statement. Because if you ask point blank, “was there a federal ban on stem-cell research” the obvious answer if pressed for yes or no, is no. TomAto, ToMAHto, the key here is that there are no hurdles, though I don’t know how much of an increase there will be because as you said, no one was stopped from doing it on there own, but I have to guess that if funding from the federal government is added in, it will definitely lead to more research.
| 31 |
Charles Johnson Thu, Sep 9, 2010 5:25:38pm |
Pushback totally expected. Not buying it any more. You know very well that this battle has many aspects, and that it’s being strenuously promoted by the religious right. The ban was on federal funding, yeah, we know that. It was a disastrously stupid anti-science move, no matter how you want to try to split hairs.
It does not change a thing about the points in my post.
| 32 |
Charles Johnson Thu, Sep 9, 2010 5:27:19pm |
Just to be completely accurate, I’ve updated the post to make these points clear. But nothing else in my post changes.
| 33 |
sagehen Thu, Sep 9, 2010 6:20:02pm |
re: #29 rwdflynavy
That fact keeps getting lost. There is no ban on Embryonic Stem-Cell research. But don’t let that get in the way…If there was great promise in embryonic like there is in adult stem cell, private companies would already be funding.
If there was great promise in space exploration, private companies would have been doing it from the beginning, it wouldn’t have needed 30 years of federal monopoly to lay the groundwork.
If there was great promise in the internet, private companies would have been funding it from day one, it wouldn’t have needed ARPNET to design the system and develop the packet-switching technology.
If there was great promise in the polio vaccine, or antibiotics, private companies would have discovered/invented them.
If there was great promise in nuclear energy, private companies would have funded the Manhattan project.
Shall I go on?
| 34 |
RogueOne Fri, Sep 10, 2010 3:06:13am |
re: #18 jamesfirecat
It’s going to f**ing fail because about 1 in every four Americans know that a majority in the senate isn’t worth bupkiss in the face of a determined minority.
[Link: pewresearch.org…]
This amendment was passed in 1996 and signed by Pres. Clinton. For 14 years the democrats have had the opportunity to do something about it and chose not to. You cannot blame the republicans for the democrats not having a backbone, But I can blame all of you who downdinged for the blatant hypocrisy.
| 35 |
robdouth Fri, Sep 10, 2010 1:01:32pm |
re: #31 Charles
How is it not splitting hairs then to mention ground zero as opposed to 2 blocks from ground zero. I agreed with you then, and I always prefer clarity to agreement (always loved that from Dennis Prager.)
| 36 |
robdouth Fri, Sep 10, 2010 1:05:44pm |
re: #33 sagehen
I think it’s a bad comparison because you’re talking about stem cell research which is within the realm of private science, just like developing drugs is handled by Pfizer and Merck, etc. but space exploration requires billions in infrastructure and cost, and I don’t think there was an idea that there would be a return on those “investments.” I’m with you on this opening up much more funding for research of all types which is great, but it’s not a good comp to use space exploration. Besides, the only good comp on that is probably that space exploration would have been subject to a lot of laws and regulations and even if a private company would have wanted to in the 60’s and 70’s, I don’t know that they would have been able to legally go out into space in the middle of the cold war. It would be interesting to know what kind of laws would have governed private space exploration.
I thought there was a lot of regulations and hurdles to overcome when the first private satellites were being shot into space.
| 37 |
robdouth Fri, Sep 10, 2010 1:11:35pm |
re: #31 Charles
I don’t understand the hostility to this view held by the religious right. Once you say “we are using your tax dollars for this” they can be against it for whatever reason, even religious because it’s their right. I’m sure they aren’t happy with stem-cell research, but at least if their tax dollars aren’t going to support it, it’s probably more pallatable. It’s a non-issue for me, because I believe my tax dollars should go to such research, but I don’t dismiss and demonize those opposed because they hold them for moral or ethical reasons, and I wouldn’t slander them as having “their boots on our neck” because they have every right to influence policy like we do when it’s partially their tax dollars at work.
If it were an actual ban on the research, I’d have much more of a problem with it. It’s the same as with abortion. I’m sure there are some who would disagree with my viewpoint which is that it’s a woman’s right to choose, but I don’t want federal funding of it. Does that make me part of the religious right and unreasonable if I vote based on my moral/ethical beliefs concerning the funding of the practice?
Hawaii’s Mauna Loa Observatory Just Captured Ominous Signals About the Planet’s Health Hawaii’s Mauna Loa Observatory just captured an ominous sign about the pace of global warming. Atmospheric levels of planet-warming carbon dioxide aren’t just on their way to yet another record high this year - they’re rising faster than ever, ...
Cheechako
The Good Liars at the Schnecksville Trump Rally [VIDEO] New theories, great tunes and SHOCKING breaking news. SUPPORT US: http://Herohero.co/thegoodliars SEE THE GOOD LIARS LIVE!WASHINGTON D.C. MAY 23RD: https://www.unionstage.com/shows/good-liars-fix-america/NASHVILLE, TN JUNE 6TH: https://www.etix.com/ticket/p/42992972/the-good-liars-nashville-the-lab-at-zaniesSAN FRANCISCO, CA JUNE 25TH: https://www.livenation.com/event/G5vYZbavGvggG/the-good-liars SUBSCRIBE TO OUR AUDIO PODCAST:Apple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-good-liars-tell-the-truth/id1731178442Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/7mgfiwzr32907N4y68eFOCJoin this channel ...
teleskiguy
Trump’s “Stolen Election” Lie Based on Evidence From Pervy Bathroom Cam-Spy OK, this really takes the cake. If you have relatives that still cling to the “election was stolen, dadgum, I jes’ KNOW IT … This should be a slight remedy to the stubborn madness Thanks to online anonymity, the ...
Khal Wimpo (free internal organs upon request!)
Best of April 2024 Nothing new here but these are a look back at the a few good images from the past month. Despite the weather, I was quite pleased with several of them. These were taken with older lenses (made from the ...
William Lewis
Gateway Pundit, Sued by Election Workers, Declares BankruptcyA onetime favorite, now just pathetic figure around these parts, Jim Hoft aka SMOTI ("Stupidest Man On The Internet"), has filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy in response to the defamation lawsuits filed against him to the same election workers that ... Khal Wimpo (free internal organs upon request!)
The Pandemic Cost 7 Million Lives, but Talks to Prevent a Repeat Stall In late 2021, as the world reeled from the arrival of the highly contagious omicron variant of the coronavirus, representatives of almost 200 countries met - some online, some in-person in Geneva - hoping to forestall a future worldwide ... Cheechako
Once Praised, the Settlement to Help Sickened BP Oil Spill Workers Leaves Most With Nearly Nothing When a deadly explosion destroyed BP’s Deepwater Horizon drilling rig in the Gulf of Mexico, 134 million gallons of crude erupted into the sea over the next three months — and tens of thousands of ordinary people were hired ... Cheechako
